Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (63545)	4/14/2003 1:41:14 AM
From: hueyone	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77400

I answered your question. Yes, on the third try, after I explained the question to you three times and finally convinced you that performance options result in an expense on the income statement.<g> This just might have something to do with performance based options lack of popularity with many managements, who are more concerned about putting a good spin on reports to shareholders rather than real performance, don't you think? You can read their 10 K, if you need any more info. I don't think so. The 10K on file gives details regarding option awards along with references to plans adopted prior to the end of the last fiscal year, ending July, 27, 2002; it doesn't describe all the details about options awarded to employees in 2003, nor would it tell us if a different sort of plan was adopted in 2003 for all or part of equity based compensation awards. I don't believe there is anything that would prevent Cisco from issuing some performance based options to employees right now if it chose to do so. I don't think it would require a proxy vote, but I could be wrong. Nevertheless, I agree that it is unlikely that Cisco is doing anything different than the usual NQSOs, but in light of their stressing that the awards are "merit based", my question seemed reasonable. Apparently the expression "merit based" didn't ring a bell with you either, or I assume you would have mentioned having heard it used before in Cisco announcements regarding stock options. Finally, in this particular case, Cisco did indeed voluntarily disclose details about this option award in an SEC filing Friday, although Cisco was not required by law to do so. This SEC filing is not available at my website source for SEC filings yet, so I plan to double check the filing as soon as it is available on this website. Or would you rather argue? No, not at all. That is why I addressed the post and question to GV Tucker, who I figured would answer me on the first try--- and we would be done with it. <ggg> Regards, Huey